Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

kiwikat

Great need for nice planes with professional cockpits for FSX!!

Recommended Posts

I like to see more planes with realistic cockpits for FSX build.The rate of releases of these nice realistic panels is much lower than there where build for FS2004, Why??. Best regards, Martijn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

>I like to see more planes with realistic cockpits for FSX>build.>The rate of releases of these nice realistic panels is much>lower than there where build for FS2004, Why??. >Best regards, MartijnI don't think it's worth putting to much money into FSX.Maybe they feel the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Realistic cockpits for me means realistic instruments that not only work 100% like their real world counterparts-but that also respond in a similar vein (e.g. smooth).I never saw that many for fs4 that met that criteria either...one of my biggest beefs about the fs series. While outside looks of planes have increased to match reality greatly, cockpits are still way behind.However, the Reality xp flightline series can be added to any cockpit rather easily ,are I think are greatly overlooked as an important add in for fs, and add greatly to reality by matching my criteria above.The Dreamfleet Dakota that was just released for fsx has Reality xp intruments included plus the Reality xp Garmin 430. It doesn't get any more "professional" or real than this imho.http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/1b5baf...b9f427f694g.jpgMy blog:http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geofa,Do you run SP2?, I wonder if the Dreamfleet panel looks the same as with SP1. I think the Dreamfleet Dakota panel functions professionally but doesn't look as good as it functions. I'm still on SP1 and most of the switches and gauges are flat 2D paintings on the panel. I use TrackIR, and since my viewpoint moves around a lot, you see the panel from a lot of different angles. This really amplifies the difference between a fully model 3D panel and a flat one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a loaded question my friend, why not indeed. The world of addons was kind of turned up on it's ear by FSX and forced software add-on developers to stop using FS98 level programming. A lot just didn't want to migrate, not to mention that FSX split the simming community into two camps, FS9 simmers not wanting to forward migrate for a thousand reasons. Anyway, FSX is a different world for everyone, especially the programmers.Randy Jura, KPDX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You cant go wrong with realairsimulations.comThey have the SIAI-Marchetti SF260, Spitfire, and the Scout package which contains the Citabria, Scout and Decathlon. All of these are top notch. I own the 260 and Spitfire for FSX. I do have the scout package for FS9 but the FSX version is on my list. All of these products are "Native FSX". RegardsBG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and for airliners of course there are PMDG 744X and the LDS-767!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And you also have the Flight1/Coolsky MD-80. Not the best VC, but the 2D panel is amazing and you have some great realism. Now, I just need to find a really high quality 777, like the 767, for some really long haul flights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Realistic VC's take time because developers CHOOSE to take time on them.The AlphaSim Long-EZ's VC was done in no time compared to other company's planes but it is the best looking of all imho. EDIT: Don't confuse the actual VC with the gauges in it. Complex avionics take longer to develop.If you look around you can find nice VC's. RealAir has some nice ones and Shockwave isn't bad either. Alphasim is starting to put out nicer ones now too (see the Long-EZ, GeeBee, and B-24). Aerosoft has nice VC's too in their Twin Otter, Beaver, Cheyenne, and in their upcoming F-16. FSX provides a platform that is FAR beyond what FS9 can offer. Upcoming releases (and some existing ones) from several companies will prove that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed with RealAir as far as the '6 pack' gauges go, but the radio's I find lacking in realism.I am a fan of Freindy Panel radios and GPS's. The GPS systems are nowhere near the reality of the RXP units, and that makes the Dreamfleet Dakota one of my favorites right now.But....I have set-up my Careado Mooney with a full selection of Friendly Panel radio's, and replaced the default 530 with a Friendly Panel 530. I also have replaced some of the gauges with RXP units. The Friendly Panel Bendix COM/NAV radios are some of the best I've seen. The mode selector switch performs as the real deal, as does the AP, DME radio, etc. Besides the Dakota, the Mooney with my alterations is probably the most realistic I have in my fleet. When RXP releases the 430/530 package for FSX, then they will get installed as well. ...My Mooney Panel:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/188548.jpgSpecial mention also has to be given to Eaglesoft for their venerable Avidyne units, and also the their work in general when it comes to instrumentation.One development I do find troubling is for many third part designers to include 3D knobs in their cockpits within FSX. It makes it darn near impossible to swap out items like the radios with my favored Friendly Panel stuff. I would rather have 2D knobs which would provide some tinkering over a 3D knob on a radios that could be replaced with a much more realistic unit.In terms of realism at cold and dark, they don't get much better than the Digital Aviation Do. The operating circuit breakers are something I wish more would include.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>One development I do find troubling is for many third part>designers to include 3D knobs in their cockpits within FSX. It>makes it darn near impossible to swap out items like the>radios with my favored Friendly Panel stuff. I would rather>have 2D knobs which would provide some tinkering over a 3D>knob on a radios that could be replaced with a much more>realistic unit.The point of having a Virtual Cockpit (or 3D cockpit) is that it is THREE DIMENSIONAL. I believe the built-in-model gauges are the future because they look SO MUCH better. Functionality will increase as the planes get better.I've got the new Dreamfleet Dakota. When it DOESN'T crash my FSX, I am amazed that people keep applauding these 2D virtual cockpits. I believe the companies who get a head start on these "new technologies" will have the advantage over those who use the old 2D-3D cockpits.Thats my 1.999999999998 further depreciated cents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not talking about 2D cockpits, I only fly in VC. I am talking about integrated 3D knobs into the model that many times eliminates the possibility to rebuild them to the owners desire with third party units.There are not any modeled 3D knobs in the Dakota, they are all very well done 2D units. I created an old school panel for the old painted version of the Dakota, and did not have any issues what-so-ever. I left Lou's current real life model (soon to be sold) as-is, cause that is the way it should be. In the newer (future) paint version I created a more modern cockpit with 55X AP unit, among other things.There are some very good units, like what Lou used, that imitate the 3D effect without the modeled knobs. All RXP's units are 2D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I'm not talking about 2D cockpits, I only fly in VC. I am>talking about integrated 3D knobs into the model that many>times eliminates the possibility to rebuild them to the owners>desire with third party units.I know... I was referring to the VC's that have 2D panels on them, like the Dakota. I would enjoy that plane much more if it had 3D gauges and didn't crash my FSX every time I used it ;)I guess its a matter of preference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"THREE DIMENSIONAL" ??? ......hey, I want a Holographic simmer's computer. And here I thought 3D was not possible on a 2D LCD monitor!Randy Jura, KPDX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I don't think the 2D gauges have anything to do with your>issue with the Dakota. I'm sure the vast majority of aircraft>you use in FS have 2D gauges.The issue is caused by Vista 32. Even though they advertise it is compatible, it crashes to desktop every time.By 3D gauges, I mean the ones that are built into the model, not holograms :(; The AlphaSim Long-EZ is the best example of them. RealAir planes have them too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the Long-EZ, although the gauges are good, the radios are lacking, as is the use of the default FS GPS.When I speak of realism, I would prefer gauges and radios that function like the real thing first and foremost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally model the VC in full 3d. I realize that it 'locks' the panel in terms of end user modification, but I really think it makes a difference in the overall 'feel'. These pictures are from my Thorp T-18 project...all of the gauges are modeled in 3-d, along with all of the switches and knobs.http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/9333/transponder1sg0.jpghttp://img148.imageshack.us/img148/1783/radio3cs4.jpghttp://img170.imageshack.us/img170/397/200...17194031ev7.jpgUltimately it's up to the preference of the developer, and/or the entity they work for. When it's my call, I'm going with the full 3-d!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your shot shows what I consider important. I spent over 500 hours flying a Debonair with the the ai that is in the Dakota above. When I see that in a cockpit something familiar happens... then the extreme smoothness of the Reality Xp programming that allows true ifr precision when using the instrument (and all the others) makes it the ultimate..imhohttp://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/1b5baf...b9f427f694g.jpgMy blog:http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/188555.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is remarkably similar to a conversation between Lou ( plane & DF owner ) and myself ( modeller ) during the construction phase. Much like Lou

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best deal for the consumer would be for developers to include both types of panels. Automatically install the one with all the 3D modeled switches because that whats most consumers want to see, and let the smaller number of those that want to install other gauges manually install the 2D panel since they already know how to modify things.I would have had a much better impression of the Dakota if it had modeled switched, knobs, raised or sunken gauges. When you use TrackIR, you really notice the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problems with modeling some of the switches and knobs as long as they are not tied to radios or gauge knobs. Or....if they are modeled to very accurate radios and gauges so there is no reason to swap them out.I agree though, a separate model for the 'panel tweaker' may be the best way to go. I do have an aircraft which a modified model was released to allow folks to replace a self-admitted (by the designer) basic GPS unit that included a 3D knob set. He released a revised model without the knobs, and now folks have the opportunity to replace the default with something that works closer to the real thing.Another example, I really like the overall modeling and detail of the FSX Cessna Caravan, and would love to fly it, but refuse to because of the over simplistic default radio functions, and they cannot be swapped because of the 3D knobs built into the model. If I could swap out all the radios with Friendly Panel stuff, I would probably fly it quite a bit actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites